I would like to suggest that strength of outfielder arms be incorporated somehow. This can have a basis on whether a runner advances an extra base or is thrown out at a base. I'm not sure how far back outfield assist has been a stat but that would probably be the best way to rate OF arms.

On another note, I am mostly in progressive leagues. As far as I can tell there isn't a way to see career totals during league play without having to add it up all ourselves. If there was a tab to see career stats within each progressive that would be great.

Coled, OF arms can't be rated. You are 100% wrong in suggesting that OF arms be rated by assists. Alphonso Soriano and Manny Ramirez have often been in the assist leaders for OF'ers. Would you say they should have A+ arms? Definately not! It means their arms suck and people run on them all the time! Therefore, they get more assists.

Thats like saying Mike Piazza should have a A+ arm because he threw out way more guys then pudge rodriguez in so and so year. Yet 45 people run on pudge cuz of his great arm, and 180 run on piazza. It's flawed.

Thanks for the info on the stats, crazy. As far as OF arms, I'm just saying it would be nice to have that as part of the game. Players, such as Roberto Clemente, who had excellent arms but crappy WIS fielding stats should have some way of justifying this facet of their fielding ability. I also agree there probably isn't a good way to measure that because, unfortunately, like lloyd pointed out, the worse arms often have the most assists. I don't know. Does anyone have any ideas how that could be put into the leagues?

Agree it would be cool aspect to have coled but unfortunately, too hard to measure accurately.

I do wonder how the stolen bases they list for old time players are often 50% success or worse, yet the old time catchers usually have very weak arms!? How are the arms that weak, AND the success rates of the baserunners both often poor?? Shouldn't the arms of catchers be better for the deadball guys ?

Another thing, has anyone noticed how most players on teams end up with 0 SB's at the end of the season? In real life, players usually end up with atleast a couple steals during the season. It would be nice if we didn't have a few players with double digit steals and the rest with exactly zero.

Posted by coled on 6/27/2010 12:53:00 PM (view original):Another thing, has anyone noticed how most players on teams end up with 0 SB's at the end of the season? In real life, players usually end up with atleast a couple steals during the season. It would be nice if we didn't have a few players with double digit steals and the rest with exactly zero.

Not sure what you're recommending here, but I am one of those owners who frequently go an entire season with no stolen base attempts. This is very deliberate on my part. Unless I have someone with a 2/3 success rate, and 20+ attempts in real life, I set his SB to zero and I absolutely don't want him stealing. I would be very annoyed if all of those guys suddenly starting attempting 5-10 steals a year.

ah...got it. That's interesting. I'm still not sure why you would use the recommended settings; i.e. why you would want guys with low success rates stealing at all - but I certainly agree that if you've got Lynn at 4, he should making at least some attempts.

Another case in point. I'm in a league that is almost over in which I have one player with 55 SB and another with 24. The rest of the team has exactly zero even though they are all set to the recommended settings. In real life only 2 of the players ended with zero

There's some sort of a cut-off point WIS seems to use for players in determining whether they'll be stealing or not. I'd guess it's based on real life stolen bases divided by real life times on base, and if a player falls below a certain %, he's not a "runner." So for example, a player with 20 SB who got on base 250 times in a season might hardly ever attempt a SB in the sim, whereas a player with 15 SB who reached base 50 times might run a lot.

I remember having a couple of players with RL SB numbers around 18 for 21, and I couldn't get them to run even on a 5 setting. I suspect it was because they were players who did not steal very much relative to the number of times they reached base.

I don't know if being a "runner" is true or not, but it takes away a lot of realism from the game. I don't think it would hurt to have a stolen base attempt per on base stat, then have them attempt a steal more or less based on how we have them set in our advanced standings. Say, for example, a player in real lift attempted 5 steals while on base 150 times. If you have him set at 3 on base stealing in adv. settings he should attempt a steal approximately 1 out of every 30 times on base.

I agree that the 3 setting should be "average" and should correspond at least somewhat to a player's real life stolen base attempts.

For some reason, though, this only seems to be the case if the player is classified as a runner. For example, I have 1990 Julio Franco in a league right now, and he's set at 3 for most games (and set at 1 when the opposition catcher has an A+ arm). Through 66 games he has 12 attempts, which works out to about 30 over 162 games. He had 41 attempts RL, so when you take into account the handful of games he was set at 1 then the 3 rating is reflecting his RL attempts pretty well.

Now, if you put a "non-runner" on 3, chances are you won't get anywhere close to his RL attempts...